A few friends of mine were arguing on Twitter about why Batman vs. Superman isn’t all that great.
- Reason 1: The title. It’s the Edge of Tomorrow of super-hero movies
- Reason 2: Suspension of disbelief overload. As I’ve said in several other reviews, a movie can only have one thing that the audience can look past. In Man of Steel, it was that Superman exists. In Batman vs. Superman, it’s that Batman exists. They also threw in Wonder Woman, Flash, Aquaman, Doomsday, Lex Luthor, and token-black-guy Steel. I know they say they’re “working up to a Justice League movie,” but they might as well have started with it. The one thing that people would’ve had to look past in that is “there are many people who look good in tight outfits who like to punch other good-looking people in tight outfits; they all have distractingly-white teeth”.
Reason 3: Superman didn’t bleed. Reading the comic where Superman gets beat up is jarring because we never see superman get hurt. Even as a non-comic fan, how many images of Superman have you seen in your lifetime? 500? In how many of them was he bleeding? One? Isn’t that the one you remember? It’s like when Homer gets hurt on The Simpsons; it’s disturbing.
- Reason 4: Superman is boring. He is invincible. We cheer for the underdog and God can’t be the underdog.
Given all that – and the number of reboots that DC tends to make on a yearly basis – here’s what I propose to be the best iteration of Superman: he appeared in 1938, just like the comics. He married Lois Lane, just like the comics. It’s now 2016 and Superman hasn’t aged, just like in the comics. How do other heroes think of him? How does he think of other heroes? Is he tired of saving people? What has the government tried to do? What does he feel responsible for? Has he given up his Clark Kent persona? How does never aging affect his personal life? How does saving the world every few weeks affect what he thinks about people?
Filed under: Unrelated |